On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 16:35 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > clone 647825 -1 > block 647825 by -1 > thanks > > On Nov 10, Émeric Maschino <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > Well, it seems that the problem isn't in fact that SOCK_CLOEXEC isn't > > implemented on ia64, but simply that sys_accept4() isn't implemented, > > right? > Right. > But I do not understand why nobody else noticed this, unless you are the > first person to install wheezy on ia64. That seems entirely plausible. > > Is it thus a kernel-related issued rather than an udev one? > Other architectures have it and I am not going to revert this change > again, so this will have to be fixed in the kernel. > I would like to know from the kernel people which conflicts I need to > add to the udev package. Don't bother; there's no reasonable way to write conflicts against kernel versions. We can backport sys_accept4 plumbing for ia64 to squeeze if necessary, like we did for armel (#625752). Ben. -- Ben Hutchings You can't have everything. Where would you put it?
Description: This is a digitally signed message part